I. THE RIGHT TO RIGHTS - Editorial
II. TOWARDS A CULTURE OF HUMAN RIGHTS AND PEACE: The Role of Universities
III. WORLD EDUCATION FORUM
IV. "DO WE TRULY WANT PEACE?"
V. HIDDEN AGENDAS IN FINANCIAL SUPPORT?
VI. WOMEN|IS RIGHTS AND RESPONSIBILITIES IN BUILDING PEACEFUL RELATIONSHIPS
VII. HUMAN RIGHTS AND TRADE-RELATED ASPECTS OF INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY RIGHTS (TRIPS)
|VIII. CHARTER 99 - The Charter for Global Democracy
I|X. THE INTERNATIONAL THEMES OF 2001
X. "EcoLink"
XI. LETTER FROM A CO-WORKER
XII. STATE OF THE WORLD POPULATION REPORT 2000
XIII. THE FIRST DAY OF JANUARY - A Day in Peace
With more and more governments ratifying international agreements and
declarations on the rights and freedoms of their subjects, and adapting
their own laws to this effect is it not awe-inspiring to observe how we
choose to use this freedom to
express ourselves? From the most ugly, depraved and blasphemous to
the most beautiful and sublime, all boundaries are being challenged and
tested; all desires, emotions and thoughts being unleashed and acted out
on the world arena.
This almost overwhelming personal response to the right of the individual to "freedom of opinion and expression", as written in the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, may temporarily be overshadowing the statement in article 1 of the same Declaration which stresses that, endowed with reason and conscience, we should act towards one another in a spirit of brotherhood. In the cacophony; confusion and travail of the former, the latter may not seem so evident within today's local/global community.
Maybe the practical visionaries who gave us the directives for the establishing of good and constructive human relationships realised that these are in themselves merely guidelines which no law, however exacting, will be able to make into living reality. That it is indeed by passing through the door opened ever wider by the growing number of conventions, laws and declarations on rights and freedoms that we human beings can learn to act conscientiously and to use our reasoning skills for the common good.
Watching the goings on on the world stage, observing, participating in and experiencing the consequences of our individual and corporate actions, we are all continuously making choices which either promote or retard the building of a fair and peaceful world. The proclamation of the "human right to peace" would in itself be meaningless if it was not seen as a goal obtainable only |t through the continued labour of all of us. Harvesting the crop of the seeds we sowed, much can be learnt about the effect of choices made.
Could it be that the only real choice -we have is to take, or not to take, responsibility for the kind of world community, and the kind of environment we have been creating through the decisions we have made? And that we will eventually come to realise that the rights and freedoms we have been given are not primarily for personal licence and gratification but for learning to do what our conscience and reasoning tells us is right?
"The heart speaks its own language; it wants to rejoice at that which is common for all, uplifts all and leads to the radiant Future. All symbols and tablets of humanity contain one hieroglyph, the sacred prayer - Peace and Unity.
Nicholas Roerich
The Declaration and Plan of Action for a Culture of Peace, adopted by the UN General Assembly in September 1999, stipulates: "education at all levels is one of the principal means to build a culture of peace". The plan of action includes a decision "to expand initiatives promoting a culture of peace undertaken by higher education institutions in various parts of the world."
As pointed out by one of the contributors to this international conference, Prof. David Adams, UNESCO, Director of the Unit for the international year of the Culture of Peace, it was the General Conference of UNESCO in 1995 that declared the major challenge at the close of the twentieth century as being "to begin the transition from a culture of war to a culture of peace." The UN General Assembly responded to this challenge by proclaiming the year 2000 as the international year for a culture of peace and the years 2001-2010 as the international decade for a culture of peace and nonviolence for the children of the world. The Nobel Peace Laureates, said Dr Adams, "have written the Manifesto 2000 in language everyone can understand, by which each individual in the world is invited to make a commitment to follow the principles of a culture of peace in every day life." The UN Declaration in effect "called for a global movement for a culture of peace, based upon partnership among states and the various actors of the civil society."
Today there are 41 UNESCO Chairs for human rights, democracy, peace and tolerance in 33 countries all over the world. UNESCO Chairs play a vital role in the dissemination of knowledge on human rights standards and, by establishing education for human rights at their own university, act as a catalyst for promoting such education at national and regional levels.
Acting swiftly to implement the 1999 UN Declaration, Prof. Dimitra Papadopoulou, UNESCO Chair of the University of Thessaloniki, presided over the Organisation of this landmark international conference. Significantly taking place within 3 months of the September 1999 Declaration, the conference could be regarded as a model for UNESCO conferences held in other parts of the world within the UN Decade |(1995-2004) for Human Rights.
The Special Adviser of the Director-General of UNESCO, Prof. Dr Dumitru
Chitoran, President of the Conference, emphasised that "higher education
is confronted with formidable challenges and must proceed to the most radical
change and renewal it has ever been required to undertake." UNESCO's vision
of the University of the new millennium, he said, was that of a pro-active
University "based on a new academic covenant, leading to a new paradigm
of higher education. In that new vision the universities should be defined,
inter alia, as institutions:
* which are fully engaged in the search, creation and dissemination of knowledge, in the advancement of science and participating in the development of technological innovation,* which identify, debate, address and propose solutions, in a spirit of learned criticism, to local, regional and international issues, while encouraging the active participation of citizens in the debate on social, cultural and intellectual progress;
* to which governments and other public institutions can go for scientific and reliable information required for decision-making at all levels;
* whose members, being fully committed to the principles of academic freedom, are engaged in the pursuit of truth, defence and promotion of human rights, democracy, social justice and tolerance in their own communities and throughout the world, and participate in instruction for genuine citizenship and in building a culture of peace.
Based on UNESCO experience, Prof. Chitoran further examined
why promoting a culture of peace should be part of the standard concerns
and of the overall programme of higher education institutions, what goes
into a successful programme devoted to the culture of peace, and how such
programmes could best be implemented.
Speaking on "Education for Peace through the unity of human rights and duties", Prof. Yves-Rastimir Nedeljkovich, International University Center-Dubrovnic, Asst. Director of the European Center for Peace and Development, stressed the need for human rights and duties to be viewed as inseparable and that to neglect this relationship makes the free development of the human individual impossible, "leading the human race into disaster". This means, he said, "universities have numerous problems and tasks to build an education system for peace and tolerance on the basis of the paradigmatic unity of human rights and duties."
It was in a Declaration of January 1997 that the Director-General of UNESCO had put forward the idea of proclaiming the |h right to peace. In his remarks at the conference, referring to this essentially radical and potentially controversial statement, if proclaimed bluntly as an unqualified right (see editorial page 2), Prof. Janusz Symonides, UNESCO, Director of the Dept. for Peace, Human Rights, Democracy and Tolerance, pointed out that such a right is already formulated in a number of international instruments which have to be qualified as socalled "soft law" and that the legal content of this human right is determined by a number of existing human rights "whose implementation has direct bearing on the maintenance of peace and the prevention of conflicts and violence." In a statement clarifying these observations Prof. Symonides concluded that the human right to peace "may be seen as an autonomous right, but at the same time as a common denominator for a number of already existing human rights - and that the debate around this issue would continue like that concerning the right to democracy and to the environment!
Dr Gerald Mader, President of the European University Center for Peace Studies, UNESCO Chair, addressing the topic "Pioneering a Culture of Peace: the role of the UNESCO Chairs and Universities", said that UNESCO's blue print for a new vision of peace was inspired and characterised by the dynamism and enthusiasm unleashed during the aftermath of the cold war. Inundated by a culture of violence there was now, he said, a longing for a Culture of Peace "where conflicts are treated and solved through dialogue, negotiation and mediation" and where confrontation was prevented by preparing for peace and not war. The aim "to create a novel peace movement which spans the globe could only be achieved and realised with tools such as education, science and culture." Universities and UNESCO Chairs, continued Dr Mader "had a special role to play as long as they impart the founding thoughts of UNESCO not only in the seminar rooms and during lectures, but also in research and hands-on projects. In this sense universities and university staff should view themselves as pioneers of the culture of peace movement."
Mr F. Rojas Rodriguez, Representative in Greece of the UN High Commission for Refugees, speaking on the development of a humanitarian conscience at the university, declared peace and respect for human rights as being two issues inextricably linked. Taking the UNHCR as an example, he said that the protection of refugees would continue to be necessary as long as conflicts, violence and human rights abuses obliged people to flee across borders in order to seek protection abroad. The development of a humanitarian conscience through the promotion of human rights awareness, he said, is bound to contribute positively and we should contribute time and resources to the achievement of such a goal.
Prof. Olga Murdzeva-Sharik, Director, Balkan Peace Studies Centre, Representative of the UNESCO Chair for a Culture of Peace, University of Skopje, Macedonia, spoke on a network of universities and referred to the UNESCO Culture of Peace News Network (CPNN) as an example of universities being a place for the free flow of information, "giving everyone a chance to learn and share all knowledge and offering a dialogue among everybodys positive actions for a culture of peace."
SOURCE: Booklet "ABSTRACTS of the international conference. Towards a culture of human rights and peace: the role of universities", now available from the Aristotle University of Thessaloniki, UNESCO Chair on Education for Human Rights and Peace, Box 48, 540 06 Thessaloniki, Greece. E-mail: dipeace@psy.auth.gr
More than 100 education ministers, heads of major international
organisations, academia, teachers, students and policy-makers, in all 1,100
participants from 164 countries attending the Forum, which was hosted by
the Senegal Government and organised by UNESCO, the UN Development Programme
(UNDP), UNICEF, the World Bank and UN Population Fund (UNFPA), unanimously
agreed that "WE HAVE TO DO BETTER".
While the overall goal of the Jomtien Conference (Thailand, 1990) with its vision of universal basic education for all by 2000 had not been achieved and much remain to be accomplished, progress had nevertheless been made: adult illiteracy is declining and new learning opportunities have been brought to millions of people through the the means of electronic communication technology. However, this very same technology is creating what the UN Secretary-General Kofi Annan is calling "a yawning digital divide" between those who have access to it and those who have not. Through the newly established UN Information Technology Service (UNITeS), coordinated by the UN Volunteers (UNV) programme, information technology professionals and volunteers are working to bridge this gap. Carol Bellamy, Executive Director of UNICEF, pointed out that "we must recognise that getting the last 5 to 30 per cent of children into school is likely to require more innovative approaches - and be more expensive - than the first 70 to 95 per cent".
During the discussions at the Dakar Forum it was recognised how much the world had changed since the Jomtien meeting: for instance in 1990 there was no such thing as internet, and the world is still struggling to come to grips with how to use this new technology efficiently for providing education for all; in the past ten years many more ethnic conflicts have been disrupting the social structure of numerous communities and increased the number of refugees and displaced persons; and speaker after speaker reminded the Forum that "poverty remains the single most important factor explaining the inability of governments to meet their goals for education for all."
The outcome of the Form was the adoption of The Dakar Framework for Action, entitled "EDUCATION FOR ALL: Meeting Our Collective Commitments". This framework commits governments to achieve quality basic education for all by 2015 with particular emphasis on girls' education, and a pledge from donor countries that no country seriously committed to basic education "will be thwarted in the achievement of this goal by lack of resources".
The World Bank President, James D. Wolfensohn, assured the Forum that "no country with a viable and sustainable plan for achieving Education for All (EFA) will be unable to implement it for lack of external resources. " At the Dakar Form, Kofi Annan announced a new UN initiative aimed at narrowing the gender gap in primary and secondary education by 2005, saying that "educating girls is a social development policy that works - It has immediate benefits for nutrition, health, savings and reinvestment at the family, community and ultimately country level."
UNESCO's leadership role in this Education For All (EFA) movement in the 21st century was fully endorsed by the World Education Forum in Dakar. The new Director-General of the United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organisation (UNESCO), Koichiro Matsuura, has in a clear and strong statement declared Education for All to be |UNESCO's foremost priority and its "most urgent but also its most noble challenge". "Basic education", maintained Mr Matsuura, "remains the only hope of enabling all nations to establish a truly democratic culture and thereby a degree of political stability, which is essential if development is to go hand in hand with respect for human rights."
But to bring education to all the world's peoples and to build learning societies will need the concerted efforts and firm commitment of all.
Source: UNESCO, 7 Pace de Fontenoy, 75 352 Paris
07 SP, France.
E-mail: efa@unisco.org Homepage http://www.education.unesco.org/efa
UNITeS contact: UNV, Postfach 260 111, Bonn, Germany.
Fax: +49-228/815 2001, website: www.unv.org
"As this newsletter is being written, the explosive situation between
the Israelis and the Palestinians is still raging. Who knows when it will
end? Who imagined that things would get this way just when it seemed some
trustworthy action was being taken to bring these two peoples to a rational
agreement so that a bona fide Palestinian state could be formed and coexist
in this war-battered Holy Land? I must confess that even I, after so many
conflicts and set-backs at the peace table, believed some resolution to
this long-standing peace process was finally not only possible, but actually
beginning to happen. And now as all the world can see, the entire process
is in ashes. Never prior to this outbreak have I seen hopes this high dashed
this low.
Perhaps we should ask ourselves if we truly want peace. There are some who say, "If we cannot have all, we will never accept less. " Others, as a result of the bitter struggle and losses, seem to be saying, "we will not stop until we have everything in our control. " Still others seem to be saying, "enough, already, let's stop this senseless killing which is getting us nowhere. " I could go on with a number of other opinions that we hear voiced from both sides, but I won't. My point is, that it is not just two sides, but many. There are peacemakers and warriors, perpetrators and victims under both flags. And to complicate matters, we Arab|, Israeli citizens are caught in between - virtually disenfranchised in the decision-making arena, second class citizens in our own land. Who hears our voice? The plurality of players in this desperate drama pits power against the powerless.
But this in itself may offer some hope for a change, some hope for light at the end of the tunnel, for the more voices, the more questions, the more openness and publicity the realities on the ground receive, the better the chance of a more viable coalition in the near term. Those of you reading this are familiar with my message. For 23 years I have felt the only way to peace is for those who have been victimised since 1948 and even before, to share the land, to come to terms with ourselves and to learn to forgive. The dynamic of peace is neither easy nor is it merely humanistic.
There is no realistic way the clock can be turned back. Demolished homes can be rebuilt, but human losses and injury can not be fully compensated. What satisfaction can we hope for in terms of justice denied for over a half century? What world court has the magic formula for restoring to its rightful heirs the land deeded by our fathers to their grandchildren? And how would that work out with those who have, by fiat or force, occupied the land and a generation of whose children have been born and raised in the political state of Israel?
Two wrongs cannot make a right. Somewhere the killings must stop. The question is, what can break the circuit and cool things down before we all kill each other? The conquest of another's land by sheer power is neither wise nor possible in a nuclear age. My own sense of things is that somehow there is a timing of human events like Ecclesiastes asserts - "a time for war, and a time for peace." (3:8b). The time for peace must be under some divinely given orders. Are we praying for peace? Peace must not be defined only in terms of cessation of hostilities or open warfare. Nor can it be accomplished by retribution, or mere restoration, since neither may effectively apply after several generations. I venture to say from experience that peace, in fact, is humanly impossible. If it were possible, we would have long ago devised a way.
It is by way of truth that we have any hope of life free from the fears born of our inhumanity to each other. The way by which I hold my enemy down, keeps me down as well. Peace cannot, however, be made apart from the human willingness to let it happen - a willingness, I might add, that will not take place until we learn to forgive the hurt we have suffered or been a part of and accept losses however horrendous. That can never happen apart from a change of heart prompted by our awareness that where there is no justice, peace is far from our grasp. And where there is no forgiveness, justice too is beyond reach. The lesson of our day is undeniably costly. The question of our day is why should we keep paying and never learn?"
This editorial was written by Elias J. Jabbour, Founder and Director of the House of Hope, International Peace Centre, Shefar'am in Israel. It appeared in the "News of the House of Hope", December 2000.
The House of Hope was founded in 1978 and is a non-profit Organisation dedicated to the realisation of peace and cooperation based on mutual understanding between Arabs and Jews. Here people of differing beliefs, cultures and traditions can meet and listen to each other, and destructive stereotypes, defences and passions be addressed and worked out through establishing substantive and constructive dialogues.
The House of Hope is planning the establishment of the First International Peace Academy in the Middle East in Shefa-amer.
The House of Hope welcomes anyone who my wish to visit the centre and invites visitors to share their own experiences of peacemaking and conflict resolution by offering valuable counsel, materials and suggestions.
Among the many House of Hope activities are:
* Sponsoring cultural and educational exchanges between Arab and Jewish children and youth including Summer Peace Camps;*Providing courses in youth leadership for both Arabs and Jews;
*Establishing an intercultural women's group for peace and conflict resolution;
*Establishing a Peace Kindergarten to begin early childhood development in a cooperative vs. competitive peace curriculum and setting;
*Providing speakers on peace dialogue for community groups, professional associations and universities in Israel and abroad
Contact: THE HOUSE OF HOPE, International Peace Centre,
PO Box 272, Shefar'am ISRAEL, E-mail: HOH@Inter.net.il
In July 2000 non-governmental organisations from Central and Eastern
Europe and the Newly Independent States, wrote a letter to the United States
Senate, voicing their concern regarding the possible consequences of a
US proposal for financial support of their region. The following
excerpts from this- letter are taken from "Go Between" 83, Oct-Dec 2000:
"We, citizen-based organisations from Central and Eastern Europe and the Newly Independent States, who are campaigning to raise awareness of the potential threats of genetically modified organisms (GMOs), are writing to express our concerns regarding US budget proposals for supporting agricultural biotechnology in our region.
There are reasons to believe that the desire to make the public in our countries more receptive to GM products approved under the US regulatory system is dictated exclusively by the financial |interests of the biotech industry. This approach exploits the lack of regulatory and institutional capacity of our State administrations, the absence of public awareness and the weak democratic structures in our region.
Although we recognise that our countries benefit from US financial support, we believe that more needs to be done on assessing the environmental, health and socioeconomic risks - as well as the questionable necessity - of genetically engineered crops before their large development and introduction in our countries. Indeed, we would prefer to see US support for more sustainable agricultural systems, such as organic farming."
In June 2000, at the General Assembly special session entitled Women
2000, Gender Equality, Development and Peace for the 21st Century, the
governments not only reaffirmed their commitment to the Declaration and
Plan for Action of the Fourth World Conference on Women (Beijing 1995)
but also agreed to assess regularly the implementation of this plan for
action and to meet in 2005 with a view to considering new initiatives.
Since this June 2000 special session some new initiatives have indeed taken place:
On 24 October 2000, the UN Security Council held its first ever session on women and armed conflict, discussing the role of women in UN peace operations and in the process of building and sustaining peace. On the preceding day, at an informal briefing, Council members listened to the views of women presented by their NGO representatives.
This historic Security Council session was called for and also chaired by Namibia and opened by the UN Secretary-General Kofi Annan. Kofi Annan reminded the meeting of the UN Charter's aims to end the scourge of war and to establish equal rights between men and women, and stressed that "we must live up to both challenges, or we will not succeed in either".
Although recent peacekeeping missions in Kosovo and East Timor had seen the inclusion of women, on a worldwide scale women are still almost entirely excluded from peace and security operations. According to Noeleen Heyzer, UNIFEM Executive Director, there are currently no women among the 61 UN Special Envoys appointed for negotiations or peacekeeping. Most government representatives who were also addressing the Council agreed with this sentiment saying that more women should be appointed as UN Special Envoys and participate in peace-building at all levels.
Angela King, UN Special Adviser on Gender Issues and the Advancement of Women, told the meeting that there is a growing recognition that the socioeconomic fabric of a country should be the major focus of peace negotiations and referred to a recent UN study: "Mainstreaming a Gender Perspective in Multidimensional Peace Operations", which found that Women's participation in peacekeeping missions resulted in stronger ties to local communities. This statement was underscored by Luz Mendez of the National Union of Guatemalan Women who said that the participation of women in her country's peace negotiations had ensured "sweeping new commitments" to women's rights and their social and political participation.
In a joint statement, presented at the informal briefing by women representing some 100 groups, it was made clear that the increasing violence against girls and women was not seen as merely an "accident of war", but instead as a "strategic weapon" used to spread terror, destabilise society, break resistance, "reward" soldiers and extract information. The statement further emphasised that peace processes must begin to view women as active negotiating partners rather than simply as victims.
The Security Council session resulted in a resolution, passed unanimously by the Council on 31 October 2000 which asks all member states to ensure increased representation of women at all levels in national, regional and international institutions related to peace making.
The resolution "urges the Secretary-General to seek to expand the role and contribution of women in United Nations field-based operations, and especially among military observers, civilian police, human rights and humanitarian personnel." (4)
In (10) the resolutions "calls on all parties to armed conflict to take special measures to protect women and girls from gender-based violence, particularly rape and other forms of sexual abuse, and all other forms of violence in situations of armed conflict."
The Security Council further invites the Secretary-General to carry out a study on the impact of armed conflict on women and girls as well as the role of women in all aspects of peace-building and subsequently to make this study available to all United Nations Member States.
Another milestone regarding women's rights was reached on 22 December 2000, when the Optional Protocol to the Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination Against Women (CEDAW) was adopted by the UN General Assembly and entered into force.
Since the Protocol was first suggested in 1976, women's rights advocates have been working consistently to have it adopted, arguing that this protocol would enable women in some cases "to shine an international spotlight on state-sponsored human rights abuses". The eventual acknowledgement by the UN World Conference on Human Rights of the need for such new procedures aimed at strengthening women's rights paved the way for an open-ended working group to begin the drafting of the text of the Protocol, and in 1999 a draft resolution was ready to be forwarded to the Economic and Social Council.
Prior to the adoption of the Protocol only governments had been able to make Presentations to CEDAW. Now this new instrument will enable individual or groups of women to petition the Committee on the Elimination of Discrimination Against Women and allow the Committee to conduct inquiries into grave or systematic violations of CEDAW.
In a covering letter from the Hague Appeal for Peace attaching the full text of the UN Security Council resolution mentioned in this article, the point is stressed that "this is a historic victory for women, and therefore for all humankind." "Now" , concludes the letter, "we have to hold our governments accountable!".
Acknowledgement: Hague Appeal for Peace, c/o IWTC,
777 UN Plaza, New York, NY 10017, U.S.A. E-mail: hap@haguepeace.org
In a "path-breaking" resolution, adopted unanimously by the Sub-Commission at the end of the session, it was emphasised that there exist both actual and potential conflicts between the World Trade Organisation's TRIP Agreement and the realisation of economic, social and cultural rights.
Highly appreciative of this resolution Miloon Kothari of the International NGO Committee on Human Rights in Trade and Investment said that "first and foremost this timely resolution signifies the resolve of the UN human rights programme to monitor the work of the World Trade Organisation (WTO)" and added that "this first historic resolution has firmly affirmed the primacy of human rights and environmental obligations over the commercial and profit-driven motives upon which agreements such as TRIPs are based."
At another meeting a few months later (30 October -1 November, 2000), organised by the UN Conference on Trade and Development (UNCRAD) the WTO's Agreement on TRIPs again came under scrutiny and was criticised for being "born out of big business interest".
Douglas Nakashima of UNESCO said that while existing arrangements for protecting intellectual property rights (IPRs) were meant to serve to protect knowledge by setting the rules for their commercial exploitation they did in fact "deliver up local knowledge to the global market place". Some 95 per cent of all world patents are held in developed countries, while a vast majority of plant genetic resources and other forms of biodiversity are found in developing countries.
This meeting, attended by Government representatives, NGos, academia and the private sector from 80 countries, was the first in UNCTAD's history to involve indigenous groups on such a large scale in the organisation's intergovernmental work.
The indigenous groups present felt that the existing IPR (intellectual Property rights) regime was not capable of actually protecting traditional knowledge. The current IPR system, comprising international agreements, patent and copyright protection and other legal instruments, is "inappropriate for the recognition and protection of traditional knowledge systems because of the inherent conflicts between the two forms of protection", they maintained.
Patent and copyright laws which have evolved within narrow socioeconomic contexts and which have been designed to protect individuals whose inventions safeguarding for their potential commercial value are not compatible with traditional knowledge which is collectively owned and which across generations and whose "worth cannot be measured by profit but by social meaning and ecological understanding. Therefore the impact of legal rights may well turn out to have impacts quite different from those intended.
It was suggested at the meeting that the most promising avenue would
be to bridge
traditional collective rights with the Western concept of intellectual
property rights.
The UNCTAD Secretary-General, Rubens Ricupero, told the meeting that it is of the greatest importance to put all forms of knowledge, traditional and otherwise, to the service of development as the very essence of the process.
Contact: Gloria-Veronica Koch, Chief, Civil Society Outreach,
|UNCTAD, Palais des Nations, CH-1211 Geneva 10, Switzerland,
E-mail: gloria-veronica.koch@unctad.org, website (www.unctad.org).
This charter was produced by a coalition of organisations committed
to pursuing global democracy and coordinated by the One World Trust. It
was published as an open letter to all peoples and governments worldwide
and presented to the United Nations representatives at the UN Millennium
Assembly and Summit 2000.
Charter 99 calls for international accountability, equality, justice, sustainable development and democracy. Since its launching, about a year or so ago, it has gained worldwide support, from two Commonwealth Secretary-Generals and parliamentarians to groups and individual activists.
The Charter founders suggest that in many ways we already have a world government but that it is not to be found in the United Nations: the real business of world government is done elsewhere, behind closed doors by exclusive groups such as OECD, the World Bank, the International Monetary Fund, the World Trade Organisation and others.
The Charter's foremost aim is to make the already existing processes of world administration and governance accountable; all decisions must be compatible with public criteria of environmental sustainability; the UN must ensure that its core mandate, 'to save succeeding generations from the scourge of war', applies equally to all the peoples of the world; global governance must be compatible with the principles of equality, human rights and justice, including social and economic justice;
All this will not be easy to achieve and "a joint effort of learning and negotiation, of trial and error, will be needed". The Charter founders acknowledge that the creation of democratic global governance may be complicated but say that the need for it is urgent, and the United Nations is "the only arena in which all countries sit side by side. For all its weakness, it retains an unmatched legitimacy in world affairs."
Charter 99 defines 12 areas for urgent action. Supporters are not asked necessarily to agree with every single proposal, but it is the founders sincere belief that active attention on all the issues mentioned in the following 12 points will lead to constructive solutions for humanity:
Strengthen democratic accountability and participation in international
decision-making:
1. Open all international institutions to democratic scrutiny and participation2. Monitor and regulate international corporations and financial institutions
3. Give UN institutions additional and independent sources of revenue
4. Make the UN Security Council fair, effective and democratic
Maintain international peace and security:
5. Strengthen the UN peacekeeping and multilateral global security
6. Reduce armaments, ratify the Land mines Ban, and outlaw weapons of mass destruction
Uphold fundamental human rights:
7. Create equal world citizenship based on the Human Rights Declarations and Covenants
Strengthen justice under international law:
8. Ratify the International Criminal Court and strengthen international law
Promote social progress and better standards of life:
9. Strengthen international mechanisms to promote prosperity and protect the environment
10. Create an International Environmental Court11. Take urgent action on climate change as a global security issue
12. Make poverty reduction a global priority and cancel the unpayable debts of the poorest nations.
While calling on the governments of the world, all world |institutions
including the United Nations to become more democratic, Simon Burall, One
World Trust Executive Director, reminds us all that "the pro-democratic
movement must itself become more democratic and inclusive".
Contact: One World Trust, c/o 18 Northcumberland Avenue,
London, WC2N 5BJ, UK.
E-mail: info@charter99.org Web: www.charter99.org
It is interesting to see how the different UN Years and Decades,
through the slow process from a proposal often made by a group or groups
of NGOs to a resolution adopted by the General Assembly, end up with several
themes overlapping and mutually supportive of each other.
The three main focusses of 2001 are a commemoration of the work of the world's volunteers, the call for a mobilisation against racism and the appeal to all of us to participate in a "dialogue among civilisations" - all within the first decade, dedicated to the establishment of a culture of peace and non-violence for the children of the world and the third decade to "Combat Racism and Racial Discrimination".
Volunteer workers cross all gender, cultural and national borders to offer their services and in doing so they create new 'routes' of communication, dialogue and understanding between peoples. UNESCO reminds us that throughout its history, humanity has been overcoming all geographical, racial and political diversities and journeyed throughout the world, establishing 'routes' of communication between peoples, exchanging thoughts, values, arts and goods.
Human diversity should be seen as stimulating and enriching, says UNESCO, providing incentives and inspiration for peoples to reinvent, refine and embellish their own cultures. Cultures are ways of living together.
A press kit on Media and Racism is being prepared, to be ready for 3 May 2001, World Press Day, and a handbook for media organisations and journalist groups on standards for training, recruitment and newsroom performance will be published by UNESCO in cooperation with the International Media Working Group against Racism and Xenophobia and the International Federation of Journalists.
The United Nations Conference Against Racism will convene from 31 August to 7 September 2001 in Durban, South Africa. It is hoped that as many non-governmental organisations (NGOs) as possible will be able to participate in this important conference. The Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights has secured some funding to subsidise the participation of NGOs from the different regions, selected by regional NGO steering committees. (NGO Website for the World Conference: www.hri.ca/racism).
As the various themes of this year suggest, it is not only political will by our governments, however important that may be, but also the concerted effort volunteered by us people, together with a real willingness to change our ways, that will be needed to create a tolerant, inclusive and vibrant culture of peace.
EcoLink is an Environmental Education and Training Development Programme
founded as a Non-governmental Organisation |(NGO) by Dr Sue Hart in 1985,
out of a deep commitment to serve the people of South Africa and dedicated
to helping the poorest of the poor.
EcoLink's mission is to enhance the quality of life for people in their own environment in a sensitive manner; to create an awareness of how they interact with their natural resources. EcoLink is committed to sustainable self-development through environmental education and skills training. Unlike other organisations which advise communities what 'is good for them, EcoLink listens to those who are seeking help.
EcoLink maintains that nothing can be more encouraging than to regain practical know-how of creating a self support system which provides food for the family and restores a sense of self worth and achievement to lift the spirit.
Since 1985, the EarthCare team has provided training in different parts of South Africa and the world. Courses offered include: environmental awareness, methods of permaculture and trench gardening; basic nutrition, baking and cooking, fence making, water tank construction; basic book keeping and business skills, needed for the burgeoning micro farmer group; as well as health care alert and counselling for those in contact with or afflicted by HIV/AIDS, tuberculosis and other diseases.
EcoLink 2000's newsletter stresses that the year 2000 had not been an easy one: "As the situation in our country becomes more difficult, the rural communities whom we serve need to turn to us for more assistance. Hence our financial resources are stretched to the limit. The pool of funds from the corporate and private sectors and from overseas donors to which we NGOs all turn is required to perform a 'bread and fishes' miracle".
But, says the newsletter, "the Environmental Education programme, another EcoLink mainstay, continues to spread the environmental word, and the members of the Youth Club Programme never fail to astonish and inspire us with their motivation and enthusiasm in the face of huge obstacles. These young men and women, who we are proud to recognise as our leaders of tomorrow, tirelessly campaign voluntarily against environmental problems and educate their peers about HIV/AIDS."
The EcoLink EarthCare programme embraces the principle of caring for the earth and caring for all of Life. Elsie Mpatlanyane was awarded by the United Nations for her unique contribution to EarthCare, personifying all that it stands for with mind, body and spirit.
Contact: EcoLink, P.O. Box 727, White River, South Africa
1240.
E-mail: eco.link@mweb.co.za
Website: Lowveld.ccom/ecolink
"It's up to us the people to see that all the fine UN statements
and signed documents do not remain a dead letter. In view of the
growing NGO groundswell, it seems that the the time has come for the people
to make sure that things change. We're tired of talk-shop conferences that
do not lead to action and a change of conditions and lifestyle (ref. your
article "Creating a Culture of Peace - the UN and I").
For this to happen we need, worldwide, a peace education firmly based on the Laws of Life and universal spiritual values, (natural and spiritual laws being the two sides of the same coin), not only in every classroom, but via the mass media and in every home and pulpit. More power to your elbow."
Emmanuel Petrakis D.Sc., Galvani 6, Athens 112 55, Greece
Despite many changes for the better, discrimination and violence
against women and girls remains firmly rooted in cultures around the world:
"passed down from one generation to the next, ideas about 'real men' and
a women's place' are instilled at an early age and are difficult to change".
Although many countries are taking steps to protect women's rights and promote equality, actual progress is slow, says the report, and such gender inequality harms womens health, and prevents many women from participating fully in society.
The report points out that this discrimination against women and girls will never stop without the support and understanding of men, especially within the family circle. But through helping women and men to communicate about their roles and their responsibilities as family members, can help protect reproductive health and reduce gender-based violence and inequalities.
The UNEPA report gives several examples of how the behaviour of men is changing and calls for increasing involvement of men in dialogues on gender inequality at large. "Systemic gender analysis and monitoring can show what is needed to respond to the needs of both men and women and promote gender equality".
The action needed to help ultimately to eliminate gender-based violence includes "advocacy, gender-sensitivity training, legal changes, improved enforcement, safe alternatives for victims, reporting systems, mediation and counselling services, and support for groups providing counselling and help".
According to the report, it is important that human rights and health education campaigns take into account the different perspectives of men and women. "Stronger partnerships among governments, NGOs and local communities to monitor and promote compliance with human rights standards are also needed."
Although it is generally speaking difficult to measure the financial and social cost of inequality, the report cites the gender gap in education as one of the instances where it has been estimated that a one per cent increase in female secondary schooling results in a 0.3 per cent increase in economic growth. The economic returns on investments in women's education exceed those for men, insists the report, quoting one reason for this as being that "women who use their skills to increase their income invest more in child health and education.", thus creating a ripple effect from one generation to the next.
Contact: UN Publications, 2 UN Plaza, Room DC2-853, New York NY 10017,
U.S.
E-mail: publications@un.org
In a January 2001 Australian radio broadcast Dr Keith Suter, Social
Policy Consultant and International Lawyer, called for a general and worldwide
observation of 1 January each year as a Day in Peace. The following
is the content of this broadcast:
"In the midst of all the election turmoil that gripped the United States in late October, a resolution was quietly and unanimously passed by the US Congress, declaring the first of January each year as "One Day in Peace".
January 1 is a new American National Holiday. The way that it was done is itself an example of people power.
Throughout the 1990s, there were various initiatives for how the year 2000 should be celebrated. In November 1999, the United Nations adopted a resolution calling for the entire world to celebrate "One Day in Peace, January 1 2000".
Meanwhile, there were not only the high profile, expensive fireworks displays that governments were planning but also low key events were planned to be carried out by ordinary people. For example, just before sundown on January 1 2000, a small procession of Israeli children and their parents entered a refugee camp in Nablus to exchange gifts of food with Palestinian children.
One of the US initiatives was to see if January 1 could become recognised as a US national holiday. Eleven-year Greg Smith led 1600 schoolchildren from Utah in a video letter to President Clinton calling for One Day of Peace. Part of the suggestions was for a national holiday on January |1. The President replied to the schoolchildren that he could not do that without Congressional support. Therefore, there was added effort to a grass roots campaign already underway calling upon Congress to declare January 1 a national holiday. This eventually resulted in the unanimous Congressional resolution, which has now been signed into law by the President.
The One Day in Peace campaign has five points worth noting. First, there have been various activities in various countries all based on January 1. There has been no monopoly on the creation of ideas. There has been a spontaneous eruption of ideas. The activists have learned from each other and have worked with each other. A sense of momentum has been built up. Second, the ideas have come from the grass roots - not the politicians. When the followers lead, the leaders will follow.
Third, this work has been helped by the Internet. The various websites have been linked so that a person could a lot of time just be going from one website to the next. The websites are all very professionally done, (One of the most stunning photographs is of performance artist Fred Stern who, with the help of the Washington DC Fire Department, created a 500-foot natural rainbow in the sky over the Congressional building.)
Fourth, there is a lesson here from the Martin Luther King holiday in the US, which was celebrated on January 15. This is now a major event, not least in the schools around that day. School classes have a special focus on his life, along with civil rights issues and history. Therefore, the change in attitudes towards racism is being achieved at the grass roots. The day provides a coat peg on which to hang these events. The One Day in Peace can provide a similar coat peg."
Contact: Dr Keith Suter, GPO Box 4878, Sydney, NSW, Australia
2001
